The licensees' analysis, commissioned by the Cranbrook Timber Supply Area licensees, examines in detail the data and assumptions used in the Forest Service timber supply analysis. The licensees' analysis identifies a number of areas where it believes the Forest Service analysis was too conservative in its approach, and then reanalyzes the information to produce a range of different scenarios and forecasts for timber supply levels.
The licensees' analysis proposes the following differences in assumptions or approaches:
Definition of the size of the land base that is economically and environmentally feasible to harvest
• the licensees' analysis maintains that approximately 20,000 hectares of problem-forest types were erroneously removed from the land base
• according to the licensees' analysis, areas with problem-forest types will become part of the land base following harvesting and should be factored into it
• the licensees' analysis contends reductions for environmentally sensitive areas were higher than in other timber supply areas in the Nelson Forest Region and that high elevation areas supporting harvestable forests were excluded from the land base
• the impact of 50,000 hectares of adjacent parkland excluded from the land base is questioned by the licensees' analysis
• further analyses that increase the size of the land base available for harvesting indicate no biological need to reduce the timber supply for five decades
Analysis units
• the licensees' analysis maintains dissimilar sites were inappropriately grouped together in the Forest Service analysis. Subsequent averaging of harvest age and green-up age affects the timing of harvest
Timber productivity estimates
• according to the licensees' analysis, an excessively high volume reduction was used to account for seed trees left on harvested areas
• the licensees' analysis questions why the relatively low productivity assumed for existing older forests was not adjusted upward for managed stands
• the licensees' analysis maintains minimum harvestable ages are high and do not allow for changes in productivity expected from managed forests
Forest management zones
• the licensees' analysis suggests the riparian management zone should have been identified on maps prior to the analysis, rather than defined as a percentage of each area
Integrated resource management
• the licensees' analysis states inoperable stands were not considered in meeting forest cover requirements except in meeting visual quality objectives
• according to the licensees' analysis, the age required to meet green-up requirements was not reduced to account for the more rapid growth of managed forests
• by applying a combination of changes to management assumptions and to the size of the land base, a timber supply level higher than the current allowable annual cut can be maintained indefinitely, according to the licensees' analysis. The authors maintain that they used "sound and conservative inputs and assumptions" in reaching this conclusion
Unsalvaged losses
• the licensees' analysis estimate was only half the Forest Service estimate
• sensitivity analyses carried out by the consultant indicate that with changes in assumptions about seed-tree volumes, minimum harvestable ages, green-up ages and unsalvaged losses, no decrease in the timber supply occurs for two decades
